Lowin, that had his instructions from Mr. Shakespeare himself." There is a stage-tradition that, in Shakespeare's drama, as was also probably the case in all the old plays on the subject, the King's exclamation of ha was peculiarly emphasized. A story told by Fuller of a boy-actor in the part whose feeble utterance of this particle occasioned a colleague to warn him that, if he did not pronounce it more vigorously, his Parliament would never give him "a penny of money."

Shortly before the destruction of the Globe Theater in 1613, and in the same month of June, there was a malicious bit of gossip in circulation at Stratford-on-Avon respecting Mrs. Hall, Shakespeare's eldest daughter, and one Ralph Smith. The rumor was traced to an individual of the name of Lane, who was accordingly summoned to the Ecclesiastical Court to atone for the offense. The case was opened at Worcester on July 15, 1613, the poet's friend, Robert Whatcot, being the chief witness on behalf of the plaintiff. Nothing beyond the formal proceedings in the suit has been recorded, but there can be little doubt that Lane was one of those mean social basilisks who attack the personal honor of any one whom they may happen to be offended with. Slanderers, however, are notorious cowards. Neither the defendant nor his proctor ventured to appear before the court, and, in the end, the lady's character was vindicated by the excommunication of the former on July 27.

When itinerant preachers visited Stratford-on-Avon it was the fashion in those days for the Corporation to make them complimentary offerings. In the spring of the following year, 1614, one of these gentlemen arrived in town, and being either quartered at New Place,

or spending a few hours in that house, was there presented by the municipal authorities with one quart of sack and another of claret. There is no evidence that Shakespeare participated in the clerical festivity, the earliest notice of him in this year being in July, when John Combe, one of the leading inhabitants, died bequeathing him the then handsome legacy of £5. It is clear, therefore, that, at the time the will was made, there was no unfriendliness between the two parties, and that the lines commencing, "Ten-in-the-hundred," if genuine, must have been composed at a later period. The first two lines of that mock elegy are, however, undoubtedly spurious, and are omitted in the earliest discovered version of it, dated 1630, preserved at Thirlestane House. There is, moreover, no reason for believing that Combe was usurious money-lender, ten per cent being then the legal and ordinary rate of interest. That rate was not lowered until after the death of Shakespeare.

an

The Globe Theater which had been rebuilt at a very large cost, had then been recently opened; and Chamberlain, writing from London on June 30, 1614, to a lady at Venice, says, "I heare much speach of this new playhouse, which is saide to be the fayrest that ever was in England."

In the autumn of the same year, 1614, there was great excitement at Stratford-on-Avon respecting an attempted enclosure of a large portion of the neighboring commonfields, not commons, as so many biographers have inadvertently stated. The design was resisted by the Corporation, under the natural impression that, if it were realized, both the number of agricultural employees and the value of the tithes would be seriously diminished.

There is no doubt that this would have been the case, and, as might have been expected, William Combe, the squire of Welcombe, who originated the movement, encountered a determined and, in the end, a successful opposition. He spared, however, no exertions to accomplish the object, and, in many instances, if we may believe contemporary allegations, tormented the poor and coaxed the rich into an acquiescence with his views. It appears most probable that Shakespeare was one of the latter who were so influenced, and that, among perhaps other inducements, he was allured to the unpopular side by Combe's agent, one Replingham, guaranteeing him from prospective loss. However that may be, it is certain that the poet was in favor of the enclosures, for, on December 23, the Corporation addressed a letter of remonstrance to him on the subject, and another on the same day to a Mr. Manwaring. The latter, who had been practically bribed by some land arrangements at Welcombe, undertook to protect the interests of Shakespeare, so there can be no doubt that the three parties were acting in unison.

It appears that Shakespeare was in the metropolis when the Corporation decided upon the expostulary letter of December 23, 1614, and that he had arrived there on Wednesday, November 16, almost certainly, in those days of arduous travel, spending the entire interval in London. We are indebted for the knowledge of the former circumstances to the diary of Thomas Greene, the townclerk of Stratford-on-Avon, who has recorded in that manuscript the following too brief, but still extremely curious, notices of the great dramatist in connection with the subject of the enclosures:

a.-Jovis, 17 Nov., my cosen Shakspeare comyng yesterday to towne, I went to see him how he did. He told me that they assured him they ment to inclose noe further then to Gospell Bushe, and soe upp straight (leavyng out part of the Dyngles to the Field) to the Gate in Clopton hedge, and take in Salisburyes peece; and that they mean in Aprill to survey the land, and then to gyve satisfaccion, and not before; and he and Mr. Hall say they think ther will be nothyng done at all.

b.-23 Dec. A hall. Lettres wryten, on to Mr. Maneryng, another to Mr. Shakspeare, with almost all the companies handes to eyther. I alsoe wrytte of myself to my cosen Shakspear the coppyes of all our actes, and then also a not of the inconvenyences wold happen by the inclosure.

c.-9 Jan. 1614. Mr. Replyngham, 28 Octobris, article with Mr. Shakspear, and then I was putt in by T. Lucas.

d.—11 Januarii, 1614. Mr. Manyryng and his agreement for me with my cosen Shakspeare.

e.-Sept. Mr. Shakspeare tellyng J. Greene that I was not able to beare the encloseing of Welcombe.

Greene was in London at the date of the first entry, and at Stratford at that of the second. The exact day on which the fifth memorandum was written is not given, but it was certainly penned before September 5. Why the last observation should have been chronicled at all is a mystery, but the note has a mournful interest as the register of the latest recorded spoken words of the great dramatist. They were uttered in the autumn of the year 1615, when the end was very near at hand.

Had it not been for its untimely termination, the concluding period of Shakespeare's life would have been regarded with unmixed pleasure. It "was spent,” observes Rowe, "as all men of good sense will wish theirs may be, in ease, retirement, and conversation of his friends.' The latter were not restricted to his provincial associates, for he retained his literary intimacies until the end; while it is clear, from what is above recorded, that his retirement to Stratford did not exclude an occasional visit to the

metropolis. He had, moreover, the practical wisdom to be contented with the fortune his incessant labors had secured. He had gathered, writes his first real biographer, "an estate equal to his occasion, and, in that, to his wish," language which suggests a traditional belief that the days of accumulation had passed. In other words, he was one of the few who knew when to commence the enjoyment of acquired wealth, avoiding the too common error of desiring more when in full possession of whatever there is in the ability of money to contribute to happiness.

It is not likely that the poet, with his systematic forethought, had hitherto neglected to provide for the ultimate devolution of his estates, but, as usual, it is only the latest will that has been preserved. This important record was prepared in January, 1616, either by or under the directions of Francis Collins, a solicitor then residing at Warwick, and it appears, from the date given to the superscription and from some of the erasures in the manuscript itself, that it was a corrected draft ready for an engrossment that was to have been signed by the testator on Thursday, the twenty-fifth of that month. For some unknown reason, but most probably owing to circumstances relating to Judith's matrimonial engagement, the appointment for that day was postponed, at Shakespeare's request, in anticipation of further instructions, and before Collins had ordered a fair copy to be made. The draft, therefore, remained in his custody, his client being then "in perfect health," and taking no doubt a lively interest in all that concerned his daughter's marriage. Under such conditions a few weeks easily pass away unheeded, so that, when he was unexpectedly seized with a dangerous fever in March, it is not very surprising that the business of